1996 Packers versus 2010 Packers

The 1996 team had much better Special Teams, and they completely dominated on both offense and defense. This team is extremely good, but they're not nearly as far ahead of the competition as the '96 team was.

The 1996 team had much better Special Teams, and they completely dominated on both offense and defense. This team is extremely good, but they're not nearly as far ahead of the competition as the '96 team was.

The 96 squad was far superior to this team! They were dominating virtually every opponent on their schedule, until they lost Brooks and then briefly Freeman to injuries. They started the season 3-0 winning the games by a combined score of 113-26. They played the Bears in Chicago and destroyed them 37-6. I can't think of any area where they weren't better than this year's edition.

I can see where you would draw that comparison. I had this feeling at the beginning of the season, a feeling that this team could do it this year. That feeling is a flame that has yet to die. Teams are always going to be compared to championship teams, always with the hope of attaining another championship. But that 1996 year was epic. It was a tremulous feeling you felt way deep down inside of you, where every play was epic and you just knew. You could feel it. There are a lot of similarities yes, but I see it in them, I feel it. It's a bit early in the season and we have those injuries to consider. If they can overcome that, they can overcome anything. Never give up. Champions keep fighting on until their dying breath. Injuries and setbacks are part of the game, you have to dig deeper, fight harder. If you want it more than anything, nothing will stop you. I believe this team can do it, the talent it there, as long as there is life, that desire within, we can do it. The only thing that can ever really stop us is ourselves.

The 96 squad was far superior to this team! They were dominating virtually every opponent on their schedule, until they lost Brooks and then briefly Freeman to injuries. They started the season 3-0 winning the games by a combined score of 113-26. They played the Bears in Chicago and destroyed them 37-6. I can't think of any area where they weren't better than this year's edition.

Last time the Packers won the Super Bowl was in 1996. We all remember the strength of the roster and the excellent coaching staff they had during that run. The same could be said for the 2010 Packers going into the season - a very strong roster and a good coaching staff (though probably not at the level of the 1996 version). Both teams had franchise QBs that were among the best in the league, strong WR corps, and strong defenses (at least while healthy).

The biggest difference I see is in the health of the teams.

The 1996 Packers lost a grand total of 2 games from their defensive starters that year. Sean Jones missed one game and Santana Dotson missed one game. The other 9 starters started all 16 games. During the playoffs, George Koonce was injured. In 2010, if Barnett is out for the season, we will lose at least 24 games on defense (Burnett and Barnett) and that assumes no other starter gets injured. Quasi-starter Brandon Chillar may be next and Nick Collins is in danger of missing some time.

On offense, the 1996 Packers lost Robert Brooks for the season in week 7 and lost Antonio Freeman for 4 weeks. Ken Ruettgers started the season on the PUP list (like Harris and Bigby), started one game when he returned and then retired. So, they lost 13 games due to starter's injuries. With Grant alone, the Packers lose 15 games and now it looks like both tackles are on the watch list.

And we are only 4 games into the season!

It takes several things to win championships - players, coaching, and some luck (injuries and a break here and there). The 1996 Packers had all of it - the 2010 Packers are looking more and more like they are only going to get 2 out of 3.

Click to expand...

Didn't we also lose Edgar Bennett in the pre-season or was that in '97?

Favre was a little better in 96. The Defense was a little better. And the STs was vastly better. Also much more consistent as a team. I only can go off of what I saw on the field this year, I would assume we would be amazing without injuries but that would be just speculative.

I joined just to comment on this thread. I'm obviously not a Packer fan (although I am for the next two weeks. I won't be able to stomach the Steelers getting 7 rings).

But a lot of people I know are just comparing the two teams position by position, but a lot of people are missing other similarities. Neither team had ONE solid super star at the top of the league at the receiver position, but both were loaded with GOOD receivers, TEs and backs. Freeman and Brooks, Beebe, Rison (for a while), even Mayes. Meanwhile, the 2010 team has Jennings, Driver, Jones, Nelson, and of course, Finley and Jackson.

The 96 team had 5 players with 30+ receptions. The 2010 team has 5 players with 40+ receptions.

They both ran a version of the Walsh offense, featuring quick slants being taken for big gains and mastery of the screen game.

Defensively, the schemes are not as similar, but the fire zone was sometimes used by the 96 team, and they had ball hawking rovers on D, just like the 2010 team.

The big differentiation is obviously special teams, but other than a lack of a Desmon Howard, and more use of spread formations, this 2010 team is eerily similar to the 1996 one.